Writing Laws For Crimes that Didn’t Violate Them

In 1934 the NFA was enacted, and it was pushed by the horrible crimes of people like Al Capone, John Dillinger, and Bonnie and Clyde, among many other Prohibition and Great Depression era criminals.

Of course the guns used were most often stolen from police or military armories, and Capone even kept a few Chicago cops on his personal payroll. The NFA was passed in the names of criminals who weren’t affected by it.

In 1968 the Gun Control act was enacted in the wake of the assassinations of John and Robert Kennedy, and Martin Luther King. None of these criminals would have been affected by the law.

In 1993 the Brady Bill was enacted in the name of James Brady, who was shot by John Hinkley. Hinkley was mentally ill, but was never committed for it until after the shooting, so again, the law wouldn’t have affected him.

Now the same logic continues:

First, it should be noted that using the term “loophole” to describe the law isn’t completely accurate. It’s not a loophole so much as a poorly written law. Many Virginians and Americans may not realize this, but the Code of Virginia allows for individuals to privately sell firearms, to include the selling of firearms at non-dealer gun shows within the state. In those sales, no background check or waiting period is necessary. You can legally purchase as many firearms as you wish. There have been many attempts over the years to address this issue within the Virginia Code, but thus far no changes have been made. This nation saw many tragedies involving weapons in the past year — Oregon, Colorado, and most recently Sandy Hook. We have and will continue to grieve the loss of life. However, the situation begs the question: If now is not the time to discuss positive reforms, when exactly is?

In Oregon and New Town, the guns were stolen…which is a crime MORE severe than an illegal transaction, and Colorado, the guns were legally purchases with a background check.

If only these people could be a little more openly crazy with their political bell-ringing. Say “In the events of recent tragedies we need to ban all the sales of Cocker Spaniels to people who at the time are invisible!”, it makes just as much sense.

This entry was posted in Freedom, Guns, Politics. Bookmark the permalink.

8 Responses to Writing Laws For Crimes that Didn’t Violate Them

  1. Rob Crawford says:

    Clearly we must also address the book collector loophole, and the plant collector loophole. Heck, why not require that ALL exchanges of ANY items of worth must go through government-approved mediators?

  2. Chris says:

    “Affected”

  3. Pingback: SayUncle » Modern lawmaking

  4. Pingback: A Dollop of Gun News « Lawrence Person's BattleSwarm Blog

  5. Sigivald says:

    To be fair, the ’68 GCA did prevent mail-order of guns to non-FFLs.

    And IIRC, Oswald bought his Mannlicher via mail order.

    So it would have … made him go to a gun dealer to buy a cheap surplus rifle instead.

    But it did at least prevent a thing that the assassin did, so there’s that. More connection than most of these have had…

  6. BobS says:

    The 68 GCA ban on purchasing rifles via mail order was pushed by the ‘store-front’ gun dealers as an attempt to keep business and eliminate competition from the influx of surplus military firearms post-WW2, requiring all ‘out-of-state’ purchases go through an FFL. Look for the FFLs to throw us under the bus AGAIN over the background checks for private sales. That may sound a bit like infighting, but there is precedent.

  7. Pingback: theCL Report: We’re Statists

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


*

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>